Hate to break it to you but the thread is already losing a lot of its charm--we've had mod intervention, it's been downvoted, and we're seeing players leaving and/or thinking about leaving. You want to see the thread devolve into a circlejerk of stubborn, spergy posters, then let it continue the way it has been.

I disagree with you about the best course of action, but I can certainly see your point. I guess I'm just going to have to wait and see.

I'm fine with tallying ranked-choice votes, since it's just a matter of punching more numbers into the spreadsheet; it's just when people keep changing votes from there that it gets annoying. Well, that and having to punch in numbers for 10 vote options.

Would having 'top 3' ranked options be an acceptable compromise?

I think having top 3 plus no vote changing/negative votes. Or only one change at the most. Top three listed in order of preference is fairly intuitive. I don't think that turns people off really.

Technically, Diogenese did. Human sacrifice wasn't even on the table until it was put on the list by the GM. Before that I was supporting a vengeance-based killing. But it's obvious that we aren't going to get any vengeance with a combination of the other voters and the GM being against it.

I am not for or against it. If you wanted to make an offering, in the past, you would have used fish, which you do not have at present.

I try to include a variety of options and you can usually write in your own.

In the previous game it made perfect sense for there to be rapid character changes because everyone was playing a god of madness, but so far we've been playing a child. I too find it odd that after voting to spend more time with dad and learning the small secrets of being a priest of Asherah our character suddenly threw everything away about his old life because a lady, that he did in fact care for but not enough to spend time with while growing up, told him that everyone was a cannibal with only a few stray inklings that it might be the case.

There's a weird disconnect between playing the character that each of us think we should be playing, and trying to figure out when that character just doesn't exist any more and that we should re-adjust what we think of him. Everyone here probably has their own idea of the actual character of Og/Ekindu but to my mind he's turned into a schizophrenic yes-man.

You want evidence, read rex monday's posts--he's considering dropping out of the game because he feels his votes don't matter any more. So am I to be quite honest. (Not because I don't think my votes don't matter but because I don't like the increasingly adversarial nature of this game) The closeness of the votes over whether or not to drop not-votes is pretty good evidence that there are a lot of people unhappy with the way the voting is currently going, so I think that's a pretty good sign that something needs to be done about it. Majority votes are OK when you have a wide variety of choices each with their own supporters. When things get polarized and people group into one of two "camps," like we're seeing now, that it becomes a problem.

By that view, any non-winning vote doesn't matter, including ones that splinter off from the same idea. That's just what happens when you've voting for one idea. In the grand scheme of things, he never had a chance of his vote winning, so does it matter if he lost by 20 votes or if the winning vote won with 20 less, but his was also reduced by the same amount?

Can't speak for everyone with a similar opinion, my thinking was that we would be fine trying to get ourselves up the tree, but trying to carry Danal up along with our spear all at the same time is asking for trouble. I'd have been fine with M winning the vote, O just seems risky.

If there is something bad coming you can't really just leave him there though, which is why I voted for just staying on the ground for now to face whatever may or may not be coming.

The thing is, it would complicate the vote enough to reduce the number of participants. I like Something Awful CYOAs, but I'm still frequently reacting to list votes with "Hell no, I'm not doing that!" I imagine that a lot of posters would be doing the same. CYOA isn't supposed to mean Choose Your Own Accountant.

I could be wrong, though.

I don't think it's that bad to be honest. We already did instant-runoff voting when we decided how to spend Og's childhood. It solves everything, really--no need for not-votes since you can vote against something by putting your ranking really low, forces you to make a "positive" choice, and and it makes strategic voting much more difficult since you have to do a lot of number-crunching to craft your vote in a way that specifically counteracts another person or group's vote.

I think changing votes with instant-runoff is OK though.

ed: also tallying instant-runoff is really easy. In the spreadsheet, in each person's column put a 1 for first choice, 2 for second choice, and so forth. At the end of the vote add up everything and the option with the lowest number wins.

Genpei Turtle fucked around with this message at Jun 9, 2013 around 17:03

I too find it odd that after voting to spend more time with dad and learning the small secrets of being a priest of Asherah our character suddenly threw everything away about his old life because a lady, that he did in fact care for but not enough to spend time with while growing up, told him that everyone was a cannibal with only a few stray inklings that it might be the case.

And I think it's odd that that single vote gets so much attention because he actually lost the main vote to Jorah.

Dad only got more time spent with him over the rest because of a mini vote of 37 people (from just 4 options).

Edit: The final result from spending time was ~87 votes:

1. Jorah
2. Alone Swimming
3. Jalitha
4. Dad
5. Mom
6. Pagam

On top of that, we specifically voted that we believe in both gods, not one over the other.

When asked who to TALK to (not the same as voting to spend time with), of the 4 choices, 13 of 37 people voted for dad. It was absolutely a small minority of people who voted this way, so why is there so much emphasis on it?

Edit2: Forgot about the reprioritization vote.

30 people voted whether to move Dad up in the priority. 21 voted yes.

Disargeria fucked around with this message at Jun 9, 2013 around 17:09

ed: also tallying instant-runoff is really easy. In the spreadsheet, in each person's column put a 1 for first choice, 2 for second choice, and so forth. At the end of the vote add up everything and the option with the lowest number wins.

It's not about how difficult it is, it's about the time it takes. 3 isn't much of an increase over 1, but 10 is a significant increase, so tallying each individual vote will start taking more than a non-negligible amount of time to do.

It's not about how difficult it is, it's about the time it takes. 3 isn't much of an increase over 1, but 10 is a significant increase, so tallying each individual vote will start taking more than a non-negligible amount of time to do.

It also increases the time needed to vote, which reduces the accessibility of the game.

By that view, any non-winning vote doesn't matter, including ones that splinter off from the same idea. That's just what happens when you've voting for one idea. In the grand scheme of things, he never had a chance of his vote winning, so does it matter if he lost by 20 votes or if the winning vote won with 20 less, but his was also reduced by the same amount?

No to no-votes. If I make a vote related to Asherah and it gets outvoted by people wanting to do something else, that's fine. When I make a vote related to Asherah and someone else votes specifically to cancel it or another like it, that's frustrating. The end result is the same, but there's a difference in how we got there and that difference matters to me.

And I think it's odd that that single vote gets so much attention because he actually lost the main vote to Jorah.

Dad only got more time spent with him over the rest because of a mini vote of 37 people (from just 4 options).

Edit: The final result from spending time was

1. Jorah
2. Alone Swimming
3. Jalitha
4. Dad
5. Mom
6. Pagam

On top of that, we specifically voted that we believe in both gods, not one over the other.

When asked who to TALK to (not the same as voting to spend time with), of the 4 choices, 13 of 37 people voted for dad. It was absolutely a small minority of people who voted this way, so why is there so much emphasis on it?

After voting to talk with him we voted to re-prioritize to focus on his teachings, and we then spent a full year learning from him. We spent time with Jorah because he was big and nice, but then chose responsibility over everything else in the subsequent vote. Plus I know that the voting went for both gods, that wasn't part of what I was talking about when I questioned Og/Ekindu's character. It has been brought up plenty of times, but after watching a bunch of our people get slaughtered by the strangers we went with them and then underwent an incredibly quick re-adjustment of character including being de facto adopted by the strange man with more fingers who had just cut our father's head off.

Believing in both gods makes perfect sense since that happened very early on in this character's story and stayed as a constant focus,but the changes that have happened in an incredibly quick amount of time are just hard to parse with the character that I got attached to.

For the people upset that you do not think your votes matter if you lost a vote, they do.

Close votes sometimes influence the outcome even if they lose and minority win votes also may be influenced by a bleed in from other options, when it logically makes sense. They also influence what options are available in future votes.

You are not Denziroh. Different opinions were fine last game because you were a god of madness and already schitzophrenic. This game, less so. On my side of the screen anyway, I have been interpreting these mixed votes as you being conflicted inside on who you are and what to believe, which I think is perfectly reasonable considering what you went through.

I would like to ask anyone who is upset to consider the following viewpoints, yours and those shared by some others.

A. You spent your entire life in one culture and knew one man as your father. You might be slow to just throw it all away. Have you? You decided by a very one sided vote to not change clothes. I can see arguments both for and against changing quickly.

B. Your "father" beat you on a regular basis and was not very nice. There was no violence in your society that you saw anyway, besides your dad beating on you and sometimes Jalitha. You may crave his approval or hate him.

C. You have been an outcast your whole life and Jalitha the most loving influence in your life, you also grew up hearing countless hero stories from another culture, many of which involved kings and heroes. You just met an honest to goodness king and apparently, monster slayer.

D. Cannibalism was a frequent theme in her stories and one you never considered might apply to you. What you take this to mean can have many responses.

E. You watched your "father" die. You may be very angry and upset. You may be scared and confused. You may be happy because you hated him because he treated you poorly.

F. You are off to go join the society whose stories Jalitha has been telling you your whole life.

Please understand that each of you have your own mental image of Og/Enkidu. I do not believe that anyone has a bad motive, everyone is trying to play him their way, which is good and is what you should do. Please do not accuse each other of having "bad" motives. I don't think anyone playing does. Debate all you want and argue, that is good, but please keep it friendly.

I am not going to change the basic format of the game. If we have some players who are unhappy because they think their votes don't matter, they do matter, even if they don't always win. I understand you are passionate about your view, which I think is good, if you were not it would mean the game was boring.

I hope no one leaves because they are frustrated but the format is not changing and I have no intention to end the game so worry not, the show will go on.

It's not about how difficult it is, it's about the time it takes. 3 isn't much of an increase over 1, but 10 is a significant increase, so tallying each individual vote will start taking more than a non-negligible amount of time to do.

Whatever works, I just don't want to see a repeat of last vote. If you look at it from start to finish it was pretty ugly. There was some initial traction for doing the divination ritual, and we saw a bunch of El-votes voting against it. Then as soon as it became clear that there wasn't much support for the ritual and their no-votes wouldn't be needed anyway, all the El-votes switched over to "no praying to Asherah" en-masse. That's where you cross the line from "a civil differing of opinion" to "gently caress you, I'm not letting you have anything" obstructionism in my mind.

Genpei Turtle fucked around with this message at Jun 9, 2013 around 18:43

The thing is, it would complicate the vote enough to reduce the number of participants. I like Something Awful CYOAs, but I'm still frequently reacting to list votes with "Hell no, I'm not doing that!" I imagine that a lot of posters would be doing the same. CYOA isn't supposed to mean Choose Your Own Accountant.

I could be wrong, though.

It doesn't have to be complicated. For those among us who are daunted by the idea of ranking items in a list, the option remains to simply rank one choice and then your vote is exactly the same as it is now.

Edit: never mind.

andrew smash fucked around with this message at Jun 9, 2013 around 18:08

There were three "winning" options at that point, Comfort Danal, Pray to El, and Pray to Asherah.

I believe it was Comfort Danal that had the most votes, and the major decision was praying to either El or Asherah. Why would you jump to hostility? I was under the impression that people felt that whatever they would have chosen was too far behind, so they voted against an option they disliked rather than voting for an option they merely didn't want.

On my side of the screen anyway, I have been interpreting these mixed votes as you being conflicted inside on who you are and what to believe, which I think is perfectly reasonable considering what you went through.

Honestly, this is the way I've been interpreting it as well. And so long as a range of options are available, and some of those match up to what I see as things Og would think of choosing, it makes sense to me and helps keep me invested. I was just worried for a while there that all of the stuff from his native culture was going to disappear after what I see as people with questionable motives removed him from that culture.

As for the no-voting, it's probably a necessary part of the game. But I was just expressing my feeling that it really sucks to have your vote cut down by a bunch of naysayers rather than be defeated by another legitimate option. Same result, but it just feels different.

Frankly, I don't know anyone who likes Chinese bronzes, but I have one of the finest collections in the country.

Wow, thread exploded after going away for a few hours.

I wonder where this 'there are always a plethora of El votes vs. 1 or 2 Asherah votes' thing is coming from? Seems to me they're usually pretty well balanced out. The last one, for example, had three El votes, and 3 Asherah votes, and the rest were non-affiliated.

Vote seems to be going in favour of keeping no-votes, which is fine, I think most people admit that they do serve a decent purpose. Where I see the problem come in is that they aren't really proportional. Negative voting allows someone to, essentially, vote for everything else. We are typically given one vote to cast, to influence things. By voting for something that isn't, say, x, we're already saying x isn't what we want to happen, compared to others. No-voting, though, isn't just doing the same thing, it's dropping 'x' proportionally to all the other votes, not just the one positive course of action you'd normally be allowed to vote for. That the no votes bring down an option with 17 votes down below one with 15 isn't a big deal, really; when they no-votes bring down an option with 17 votes and end up making it less heard than one with 3, that seems problematic. In no-voting something, you essentially get to cast multiple positive votes for everything else rather than one vote to influence a positive outcome.

I still, personally, see it like this: say you're, oh, playing a strategy game or something. You may strongly prefer a defensive strategy, that's how you like to play, but although that's the generally prevailing sentiment, you can't settle on what the best defensive strategy is, so you have vague impulses towards a range of them. However, you have a significantly, decisively strong feeling that an aggressive strategy here will work, and is the strongest single option. Tallied up, it may have less of your general support behind it, but nevertheless, it's the way you want to go here, because it's the only option standing out predominantly. That's how the votes, I think, represent Og's reasoning.

Might want to say that, maybe it's not just that you prefer a defensive strategy, but you hate aggressive strategies, so even though the defensive parts aren't united in a single option, they are united in not going aggressive, which would preclude an aggressive option from ever taking off, no matter how strongly felt, and this is where negative votes come in. Maybe, but I don't see that as correct; when you're positive voting something else, the fact that you're against the alternative is already inherent in your choice, you're already 'no-voting' in doing so, and we, as the voters, represent individual choices. The culmination of those individual choices are supposed to represent his general psyche, right? The individual choices can't both make an individual choice and speak for the general psyche, one voice shouldn't get to represent a general position, it's one voice, general positions should be taken as a result of the individual votes that make up his consciousness.

Ah well. I suppose I can see, too, why some people see them as inherently confrontational. On top of it basically dismissing other peoples' votes in favour of literally everything else, giving it disproportionate negative influence, it's not just counter-balancing those votes, it's literally wiping them out, making them as though they don't matter. What goes from being a strong voice in Og's subconscious, as represented by, say, a 40% vote, ends up being erased, turned to nothingness, when after negative votes, those 40% voters end up with only a 2% representation in the totals. It's not just weighing against the choices of voters, it's erasing them, moving them from being a 40% minority at 15 votes, a strong influence, to a nothing minority at 2 effective votes or something.

That, and it can't help but seem inherently targetted. I mean, people only vote for them in response to others voting certain ways. If the option weren't getting a lot of traction, nobody would use a negative vote, suggesting that the sentiment being expressed isn't really 'I don't know what I want, but I know what I don't want, so instead I want just to represent a strong general inclination here', since if that were the case they'd have no voted regardless. Rather what's being expressed is 'I may have a favoured option (which in itself casts a vote against other options by favouring the one), but I'm going to disregard it just to ensure this guy (represented by his vote) can't have things as he wants it'. It's probably not what's actually going on, but I can see it coming across that way. What ought to ensure that certain votes can't go a certain way is by them being outweighed by alternatives, I think, not denied by negative parties. I mean, what if real votes worked that way? Every Republican in American negative-votes the Democratic option instead of voting for the Republican party, and so instead neither end up winning and some third party gets elected with 10% of the overall vote.

Anyway, that's my piece on it. Like I've said before, I'd prefer no-votes, but they do serve a purpose, I'm not really going to complain either way. I do hope people are able to have a more chill time though, sucks that we actually get people reporting others, and insisting opposing parties must be trolls, instead of just hanging out with people of differing opinions and seeing how the game goes.

Labaras went into the wilds and brought Enkidu food and then, brought him a slave from the Temple of El, to um... shall we say, gentle him.

Smellrose

Voting for:
OPTION M. Climb a tree and see if that gives you any hints on where to go, maybe we can see the fire or smoke.
And No to No Votes, because "no against no" is the only comedy option this round.

For me, I come to the CYOA thread because I want to play and read a story, I could in the end care less if what I wanted to do ended up happening, it's just fun to try and go whatever direction I feel would be good for what I think the character should do. In the end, it's all up to dice and Dio's brain to make the story, and I enjoy that the most rather than me getting my way.

Thanks Dio for making the thread, I'm having a great time and I'll be here till the end

You climb the tree with Danal on your back, to hide from whatever hungry beasts may be in the forest this night. You may not have much knowledge of moving through the forest, but you have no difficulty climbing it. As you sit upon one of the branches with Danal, he asks you a question, but you don't understand.

You smell something burning.

The tree you climb is a particularly tall one and when you reach it's top, you can see for miles. The dark treetops extends as far as you can see in every direction, their rise and fall almost like the waves you know so well.

As you look across the endless trees, you see a pillar of smoke. The campfire. You make your way down the tree and move towards it. You have to climb two more trees on your way back to keep on course. You hear a number of strange animals make loud and terrifying noises on the way, but you return to the camp, without incident. Danal has had a long day and now a nighttime adventure. He has fallen asleep.

You carefully replace the spear back by the fire where you found it and then sneak into Tudiya's tent. The enormous king appears to be sleeping.

You hold still for a long moment. Tudiya has not moved, beyond the rising and lowering of his huge chest.

You place Danal back into his bed and then cover him with a blanket.

You hold still for a long moment. Tudiya has not moved.

You creep out of the tent and back into yours. You creep past your mother and Keza, back to where you were awoken by Danal several hours ago, close your eyes and fall asleep to the symphony of birds, bugs and monsters.

The next morning, you awaken to a strange but good smell and eat something very odd, but good and much sweeter than you are used to. You would be unaware that it was a sort of oatmeal sweetened by honey with chunks of meat in it. Danal gives you a number of grins, rooted in the surely forbidden thing the two of you did last night but no one appears to have discovered your outing.

After you all finish eating, camp is packed up and you continue on your journey.

You spend the next few hours walking beside Danal, chatting with him playing simple games and occasionally talking with the other outsiders. Today has been a good day. No one has hit you, a rare treat, nor has anyone even threatened to do so.

Danal, being the youngest of the group, often rides on the donkeys when he gets tired. He rode your shoulders for part of the day yesterday and it did not tire you out. However, upon thinking more on the past days events it is abundantly clear that when Danal slashed his stick through the air, he imagined he was riding some sort of great beast or monster, like from the stories. You. This made him very happy. After a few hours of walking this morning, he indicates by gestures that he wants to "Play Labaras". You have a long trip ahead of you and your decision now is likely to set your daily routine in regard to Danal.

QUESTION ONE. Please only pick one, the one that most represents your view, even if several do.

You...

OPTION A Let him ride on your shoulders because you want to make him happy.

OPTION B Let him ride on your shoulders because you think it will be beneficial to your long term well being if Danal likes you.

OPTION C Let him ride your shoulders because you are afraid he will not like you if you say no.

OPTION E Do not let him ride your shoulders because if you let him treat you like a beast of burden, you fear he will not respect you.

OPTION F Do not let him ride your shoulders because if you let him treat you like a beast of burden, you fear others will see you as being at the bottom of the social ladder and you want more out of life.

OPTION G Some other reason, you do not let him up - Specify.

OPTION H Some other reason, you do let him up - Specify.

A/B/C/D/H will be mashed together, as will E/F/H, the winning vote will decide both what happens and the motivation.

When Danal comes back again for another late night adventure tonight or another night, and he surely will, do you sneak out again? This too, is likely to set the routine to some degree for the rest of your journey.

QUESTION TWO.

OPTION A Yes! Adventure time! Bonding! Treasure! Monster slaying! You handled problems last time and you will next time too!

OPTION B Yes! But, you will be a bit more... careful to avoid getting lost. You will stay close to the camp and force Danal to not run off if he tries to.

OPTION C No. That was a one time trip, it is too dangerous to make it into a routine, we could get lost, injured or caught as we sneak out and the consequences could be dire.

As you walk today, you learn several things from your new companions.

You are traveling far to the north and a little to the east. It will take about a month to get to Zepath which apparently is the southern most of the cities of your mother's stories.

You will travel by foot the entire way.

Tudiya, apparently, set out into the unknown to see what he could find. This is usual Kingly behavior according to your mother's stories, kings are always larger than life figures in them. Tudiya brought his young son along and potentially into danger to give him his first taste of Kingly adventuring. Zepath was apparently founded by some relative of Labaras who had wanderlust and the kings of Zepath are also said to have wanderlust.

It is believed among the group that the true purpose of the trip was nothing less than an unknown holy task. Surely Tudiya was sent by El to rescue you and your mother, to answer her prayers. This is, according to your companions anyway, a perfectly credible and reasonable explanation and is one perfectly in line with your mother's stories, many of which begin when Kings and other heroes set off to vanquish monsters or save people. This sort of thing apparently happens all the time.

QUESTION THREE.

You do spend some time with people besides Danal and have ample opportunities to ask questions. Who else do you talk to, today? You will get a question session with the winning vote.

OPTION A. The king, Tudiya.OPTION B. Your mother, Jalitha.OPTION C. Your new friend, Danal.OPTION D. The servant woman, Keza.OPTION E. Barkof, who seems to bring Tudiya's number two among the group.OPTION F. Aron, who seems to be the youngest of the outsider men in his mid 20s.OPTION G. Ishamal, who seems to be the oldest of the outsider men, who is balding and has gray hair.OPTION H. No one, you are tired from last nights festivities.

1. We're playing with the king's only son. He may not have access to other children, and he's our first friend. If he wants to play with us, why not?
2. Good observation and perception are always good skills for an aspiring hero.
3. We don't know how much time is going to pass in the next couple of votes, so let's talk to the old man while he's here.

HiHo ChiRho fucked around with this message at Jun 9, 2013 around 20:12

A weird time in which we are alive. We can travel anywhere we want, even to other planets. And for what? To sit day after day, declining in morale and hope.

C, A, E

Let him ride because we're afraid to say no. Realistically, a kid who has been beat every day unless he does what he's told is going to keep acting like that for the near future. It's all he knows!

Adventures become the norm - see above, same reasoning - we don't want to (or can't) tell Danal "No".

Barkof, because let's get someone new's thoughts, and we are likely to become Danal's number two anyways as time goes on. Let's learn what we can from the other number two, like who does number two work for?

Edit: Re: below - agreed, but I feel like that's what we did last night. We barely made it back and didn't get beat - let's not press our luck. With time, I think we should more but on day two its time to try and fly under the radar.

Task Manager fucked around with this message at Jun 9, 2013 around 20:27